Purported Logitech gamepad could be the first in a wave of iOS gamepads.

Most of the buzz about Apple's next version of iOS has been about its brand-new design direction, but iOS 7 will also bring about a number of under-the-hood changes. One of these, according to Apple's keynote, are new APIs (and MFi certification) for third-party gamepads. A tipster has alerted Kotaku to what is allegedly one of the first. The accessory, reportedly made by Logitech, looks like it has five buttons and a thumbpad at the very least, and it will connect to the iPhone (and perhaps the fifth-generation iPod touch) using an integrated Lightning connector.

While accessories like the iCade lineup have already tried to bring button-based gaming to iOS, the APIs will give hardware makers some consistent guidelines for building their own controllers. Apple's API will make supporting controllers a bit easier for developers. Rather than having to code specifically for an individual accessory like the iCade, they can now code for generic controllers and let gamers choose the ones they want.

However, since these controllers are still just add-ons, game developers looking to get the most bang for their development buck may simply continue to code for the input device that each iOS device is guaranteed to have: the touchscreen. Optional input devices and other hardware accessories built for traditional game consoles have historically had a pretty spotty rate of success—devices like Microsoft's Kinect have sold relatively well, but everything from Sony's PlayStation Move to Sega's old 32X failed to sell enough to gain significant developer support.

That's right, Federighi mentioned that there were "APIs", not an API, for game controllers. It was also on the slide shown on the screen. In addition there are APIs for sprites, and likely more.

I doubt there will be a problem selling these. Don't look to other consoles as an example. We've been waiting for controllers for iOS for years. You can be sure they will sell in large numbers. On other consoles, the manufacturers supply controllers, so there is little incentive to buy another.

With these being Apple supported, game companies are sure to jump on the bandwagon. The current controllers are pretty useless. They only support a handful of not very major games. Pretty much a waste of money. This will change that.

This could actually be a big deal. The iPad 4 is agreed to be more powerful than the current generation of consoles. The iPhone 5 is close. The new ones coming out this fall will be considerably more powerful if Apple follows its past curve.

And for us retro fans, this could open up the likelihood of having classic games from various iterations make their way onto iOS. If developers don't have to contend with updating all the traditional controls for touch (probably the biggest hurdle) then we might see more ports come pop up under the "must have a controller" requirements. Considering how poorly many older games adapt to touch, I think that would be a good thing.

I have trouble seeing how a controller for a smartphone is a good idea. This would work for the ipad, but holding a controller squinting at your tiny propped up iphone doesn't sound like a very good or fun experience.

we might see more ports come pop up under the "must have a controller" requirements.

Pretty sure Apple is going to reject all apps that don't at least have some virtual touch controls option. I doubt "controller required" will ever happen, even if in practice it's the best way to play.

And for us retro fans, this could open up the likelihood of having classic games from various iterations make their way onto iOS. If developers don't have to contend with updating all the traditional controls for touch (probably the biggest hurdle) then we might see more ports come pop up under the "must have a controller" requirements. Considering how poorly many older games adapt to touch, I think that would be a good thing.

I don't think you're likely to see much of that. If a developer can't make at least a half-assed usable touch interface, I doubt they'll put a game out on the store.

You'll have games like GTA: Vice City which come out with a playable touch interface, but now connect a bluetooth controller, and the virtual buttons melt away and leave you feeling like you're playing a PS2 with less aliasing.

I have trouble seeing how a controller for a smartphone is a good idea. This would work for the ipad, but holding a controller squinting at your tiny propped up iphone doesn't sound like a very good or fun experience.

If you look at the picture in the article, the idea would support using game pads you attach to you phone. This would allow you to game with proper hand held controls and possibly extend battery (built in battery ala juice cases) while not looking silly when using your phone as a phone.

I have trouble seeing how a controller for a smartphone is a good idea. This would work for the ipad, but holding a controller squinting at your tiny propped up iphone doesn't sound like a very good or fun experience.

But you are forgetting about AirPlay. You can send a full1920/1080p over AirPlay through the aTv to your big screen.

So the iPhone or iPad are just acting like a console, and can sit in your pocket, for the iPhone, or anywhere else for the iPad, just like any other console.

Frankly I have been waiting for this for years. I see plenty of console and portable games (a la Final Fantasy series and numerous side scrollers) being ported to the iOS platform, yet I have tried and tried and just loathe using touchscreen controls. I crave some sort of tactile feedback.

When you are in the heat of a fighting game or trying to do wall jumps, you don't want to screw up just because you didn't know you finger wasn't on the button! (Not to mention the fact of how much screen real estate is wasted trying to graph the controls onto the screen in the first place!)

iPad 4 is agreed to be more powerful than the current generation of consoles. The iPhone 5 is close. The new ones coming out this fall will be considerably more powerful if Apple follows its past curve.

Uh... No it's not. The sgx 544 mp4 gets a little over 70 gflops, while the consoles are around 230-240 gflops. Interestingly, intel hd 4000 is around 200, while the "next-gen" PS4 using a 2 year old graphics card/architecture gets 1.84 TFLOPS.

we might see more ports come pop up under the "must have a controller" requirements.

Pretty sure Apple is going to reject all apps that don't at least have some virtual touch controls option. I doubt "controller required" will ever happen, even if in practice it's the best way to play.

I have trouble seeing how a controller for a smartphone is a good idea. This would work for the ipad, but holding a controller squinting at your tiny propped up iphone doesn't sound like a very good or fun experience.

But you are forgetting about AirPlay. You can send a full1920/1080p over AirPlay through the aTv to your big screen.

So the iPhone or iPad are just acting like a console, and can sit in your pocket, for the iPhone, or anywhere else for the iPad, just like any other console.

we might see more ports come pop up under the "must have a controller" requirements.

Pretty sure Apple is going to reject all apps that don't at least have some virtual touch controls option. I doubt "controller required" will ever happen, even if in practice it's the best way to play.

Not necessarily, because I see that requirement as no different as buying any other external piece of hardware that your iDevice plugs into; you need the hardware for the app to be useful, and you need the app to use the device. What would be the difference with a game and controller combo?

I sometimes wonder whether this is the marketing department of the company responsible for the device, testing the temperature of the market by "leaking" a grainy photograph of the latest thing that we're not supposed to know about!

I have trouble seeing how a controller for a smartphone is a good idea. This would work for the ipad, but holding a controller squinting at your tiny propped up iphone doesn't sound like a very good or fun experience.

But you are forgetting about AirPlay. You can send a full1920/1080p over AirPlay through the aTv to your big screen.

So the iPhone or iPad are just acting like a console, and can sit in your pocket, for the iPhone, or anywhere else for the iPad, just like any other console.

From what I've heard AirPlay is terribly laggy and stuttery for playing games. Not sure if apple improved it ios 7.

iPad 4 is agreed to be more powerful than the current generation of consoles. The iPhone 5 is close. The new ones coming out this fall will be considerably more powerful if Apple follows its past curve.

Uh... No it's not. The sgx 544 mp4 gets a little over 70 gflops, while the consoles are around 230-240 gflops. Interestingly, intel hd 4000 is around 200, while the "next-gen" PS4 using a 2 year old graphics card/architecture gets 1.84 TFLOPS.

I'm simply going by what some major game developers, such as Carmak, have said, publicly, and reported here. I assume they know what they're talking about.

I have trouble seeing how a controller for a smartphone is a good idea. This would work for the ipad, but holding a controller squinting at your tiny propped up iphone doesn't sound like a very good or fun experience.

But you are forgetting about AirPlay. You can send a full1920/1080p over AirPlay through the aTv to your big screen.

So the iPhone or iPad are just acting like a console, and can sit in your pocket, for the iPhone, or anywhere else for the iPad, just like any other console.

From what I've heard AirPlay is terribly laggy and stuttery for playing games. Not sure if apple improved it ios 7.I

I use it. It works pretty well. With the new networking g standard, it will just get better.

iPad 4 is agreed to be more powerful than the current generation of consoles. The iPhone 5 is close. The new ones coming out this fall will be considerably more powerful if Apple follows its past curve.

Uh... No it's not. The sgx 544 mp4 gets a little over 70 gflops, while the consoles are around 230-240 gflops. Interestingly, intel hd 4000 is around 200, while the "next-gen" PS4 using a 2 year old graphics card/architecture gets 1.84 TFLOPS.

I'm simply going by what some major game developers, such as Carmak, have said, publicly, and reported here. I assume they know what they're talking about.

we might see more ports come pop up under the "must have a controller" requirements.

Pretty sure Apple is going to reject all apps that don't at least have some virtual touch controls option. I doubt "controller required" will ever happen, even if in practice it's the best way to play.

A man can dream Aurich, a man can dream....

What possible reason can you have for wanting it to be a requirement instead of just an option...

we might see more ports come pop up under the "must have a controller" requirements.

Pretty sure Apple is going to reject all apps that don't at least have some virtual touch controls option. I doubt "controller required" will ever happen, even if in practice it's the best way to play.

Not necessarily, because I see that requirement as no different as buying any other external piece of hardware that your iDevice plugs into; you need the hardware for the app to be useful, and you need the app to use the device. What would be the difference with a game and controller combo?

There's a hard-to-define-exactly but tangible difference between

1) We make this peripheral, and you download our software to use it. (The peripheral is the product and the software enables it.)

2) We make this software, and you need to buy this extra peripheral to use it. (The software is the product but extra hardware is required to implement it.)

There's an easy solution, though. It's not hard to implement a gamepad interface on the touchscreen, even if the "preferable" way will be to use a hardware gamepad. I doubt Apple would have a problem with someone claiming "does not require, but works best with, a gamepad" (although a marketer would word that better than I did).

we might see more ports come pop up under the "must have a controller" requirements.

Pretty sure Apple is going to reject all apps that don't at least have some virtual touch controls option. I doubt "controller required" will ever happen, even if in practice it's the best way to play.

A man can dream Aurich, a man can dream....

What possible reason can you have for wanting it to be a requirement instead of just an option...

If you read my whole post, I was remarking on the fact that many older games don't see ports onto iOS because of the need to convert controls to touch. The controller requirement would only be an option if devs were free to port games onto iOS without having to implement touch based controls, if it meant more ports see the light of day.

The new ones coming out this fall will be considerably more powerful if Apple follows its past curve.

The yearly release schedule could be a key advantage over consoles, if Apple ever brings games to Apple TV.

(And I feel like the controller API cinches it -- just a matter of time now.)

In the lightning-fast tech world, why do the console makers even remotely think they can operate on a five-year upgrade cycle anymore? They should be thinking about annual speed bumps and upgrading functionality (new input system, for instance) every few cycles.

we might see more ports come pop up under the "must have a controller" requirements.

Pretty sure Apple is going to reject all apps that don't at least have some virtual touch controls option. I doubt "controller required" will ever happen, even if in practice it's the best way to play.

A man can dream Aurich, a man can dream....

What possible reason can you have for wanting it to be a requirement instead of just an option...

If you read my whole post, I was remarking on the fact that many older games don't see ports onto iOS because of the need to convert controls to touch. The controller requirement would only be an option if devs were free to port games onto iOS without having to implement touch based controls, if it meant more ports see the light of day.

I don't know if this would violate a policy, but if the Emulator/App handled all the touch overlay controls and allowed you to hide them when a controller was connected, then there would be no need to go to the trouble to overlay buttons on every single game. So the emulator would act as an in app purchase store, and then the screen real-estate won't be covered up by kludgy virtual buttons.

That's right, Federighi mentioned that there were "APIs", not an API, for game controllers. It was also on the slide shown on the screen. In addition there are APIs for sprites, and likely more.

I doubt there will be a problem selling these. Don't look to other consoles as an example. We've been waiting for controllers for iOS for years. You can be sure they will sell in large numbers. On other consoles, the manufacturers supply controllers, so there is little incentive to buy another.

With these being Apple supported, game companies are sure to jump on the bandwagon. The current controllers are pretty useless. They only support a handful of not very major games. Pretty much a waste of money. This will change that.

This could actually be a big deal. The iPad 4 is agreed to be more powerful than the current generation of consoles. The iPhone 5 is close. The new ones coming out this fall will be considerably more powerful if Apple follows its past curve.

Not to mention the increased demand in controller support might kickstart similar global controller support in similar games for android (more so than now), as Android gamers ask for the same treatment as ios gamers.

we might see more ports come pop up under the "must have a controller" requirements.

Pretty sure Apple is going to reject all apps that don't at least have some virtual touch controls option. I doubt "controller required" will ever happen, even if in practice it's the best way to play.

A man can dream Aurich, a man can dream....

What possible reason can you have for wanting it to be a requirement instead of just an option...

If you read my whole post, I was remarking on the fact that many older games don't see ports onto iOS because of the need to convert controls to touch. The controller requirement would only be an option if devs were free to port games onto iOS without having to implement touch based controls, if it meant more ports see the light of day.

I fail to see how mapping virtual touch controls would be any harder then mapping the iOS API'd controls.

I have trouble seeing how a controller for a smartphone is a good idea. This would work for the ipad, but holding a controller squinting at your tiny propped up iphone doesn't sound like a very good or fun experience.

This is the one thing that Apple lacked in order to really impact the consoles. With this in place (and having already gotten the games, the publishers, and Airplay to AppleTV on your HDTV), Apple finally has all the pieces to be a genuine threat to publishers.

Android has had this for a while, so put the two together and suddenly you're going to have a lot of controller support for games and consequently a lot of ports from existing platforms that are strongly preferred with hardware controls. Touch is a poor substitute for an iPad when you could just get a stand, bond a bluetooth controller, and bam. Or make a slip-on that goes around an iPhone like this.

Of all the news at E3, it was this announcement/reveal not even at E3 that is going to send shockwaves through the industry before it's done. This is the most important thing that happened last week. The PS4 and Xbox One and Wii U will fade away, but this--controller support actually built into iOS 7--is going to devastate the gaming industry's existing model.

Look at what Apple (and to a lesser extent Android) has done with just touch. Imagine Apple updates AppleTV with real apps and this. Ouya, less open, but suddenly it takes every app that uses controllers. Look how many people who will own an AppleTV without the need for games, then imagine it offered them. Look how many people are incredibly happy just gaming on their iPad, then imagine how many more will be happy once there are more precise hardware controls.

Consoles are now on a ticking clock. MS and Sony are now likely to speed up their transitions to Surface and Android, respectively.

I have trouble seeing how a controller for a smartphone is a good idea. This would work for the ipad, but holding a controller squinting at your tiny propped up iphone doesn't sound like a very good or fun experience.

I have trouble seeing how a controller for a smartphone is a good idea. This would work for the ipad, but holding a controller squinting at your tiny propped up iphone doesn't sound like a very good or fun experience.

ever seen a PSP?

No, because no one actually bought them. Zing! JK. But in all seriousness, I'm not sure why playing the phone attached to a controller would require anymore squinting then just normal holding. I mean handheld gaming machines and have been around forever and they seem to have been doing just fine until recently.

I have trouble seeing how a controller for a smartphone is a good idea. This would work for the ipad, but holding a controller squinting at your tiny propped up iphone doesn't sound like a very good or fun experience.

Andrew Cunningham / Andrew has a B.A. in Classics from Kenyon College and has over five years of experience in IT. His work has appeared on Charge Shot!!! and AnandTech, and he records a weekly book podcast called Overdue.